Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Is &a[NTHINGS] legal
Message-ID: <7831@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 4 May 88 18:10:35 GMT
References: <12074@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <7806@brl-smoke.ARPA> <2637@ttrdc.UUCP> <1450@iscuva.ISCS.COM>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <1450@iscuva.ISCS.COM> carlp@iscuva.ISCS.COM (Carl Paukstis) writes:
>=In article <7806@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
>=# Every object must have at least one addressable cell beyond it,
>=# but not necessarily in front of it.  
>It seems, however, that there need not be an addressable OBJECT
>beyond the array bound, ... There must be a valid ADDRESS ...

I thought this was clear enough.  Obviously, if every object had to have
another finite object behind it, the existence of even one object would
force an infinity of them, which is patently absurd.  It's also not what
I said.